Swapping from red diesel to HVO fuel

[peterboat]

1 hour ago, Loddon said:

I wouldn't consider an electric boat for the  same base reason I wont consider an electric car its to much money.

Spending at least £100k+ on a boat is nonsensical when you consider  that the canal system as we have known it will be gone in ten years.

 

19 minutes ago, Loddon said:

We will see in 2032 whether I'm right or not, at the least canals will be in terminal decline.

Actually Julian I think you will be right, my last time out I noticed a big decline in the big navigation up here, piling had collapsed into the waters all over the place.

Fishermen had managed to stop commercial boats on the Aire and Calder a navigation that had, had billions spent on it for commercial boats! It might be overturned but who knows?

And now stoppages all over due to water shortages , in reality farmers quite rightly are drawing millions of gallons of water off to water crops which are more important than us boaters. We are the bottom of the food chain so yes maybe the time is drawing in on our boating way of life.

You are right I wouldn't spend a fortune on a boat now in fact if I had a good offer I might sell mine and buy an electric campervan 

[dmr]

3 hours ago, Goliath said:

Can you explain how ?

I know you know your stuff

 

Cleaner fumes? Better consumption?

 

 

Have not measured consumption, its likely a bit worse, but the engine is much quieter and smoother, and sounds generally nicer. The JD3 does have harsh combustion (because its relatively modern) so I am assuming that the higher cetane rating of HVO has smoothed the combustion.

The most surprising thing, after 12,000 hours I was just starting to see a little oil consumption and since going to HVO this has gone back to zero, I don't understand this unless its unsticking slightly sticky rings (which I doubt)   any theories????

[PD1964]

2 hours ago, Loddon said:

I wouldn't consider an electric boat for the  same base reason I wont consider an electric car its to much money.

Spending at least £100k+ on a boat is nonsensical when you consider  that the canal system as we have known it will be gone in ten years.

 Even more foolish if your spending over £230K then, 

1 hour ago, IanD said:

That's not what Spey said -- are you telling me they're not traditional? And I happen to know that several such boats have successfully done the Ribble link, which kind of pooh-poohs your comment... 😉

I take it the owner’s of these working boats, worked the Trent and the Northern waterways when it was a full commercial system?
 There’s still old commercial boatman around and they say they used the tides. They will tell you that some of the flat fronted keels with full loads couldn’t do it against a full tide.
  Your talking about old working Narrowboats carrying no cargo, go and stick 50 ton and more of cargo in, totally different scenario to a fully laiden boat. Your talking to people that have bought into it and not people that used to do it, back in the 60’s all the way up to a few year ago. Also your talking narrowboats with 20hp engines, I’m talking Sheffield, Humber, Barnsley Keels roughly 60ft x 15ft with a JP2 or JP3 working the Tidal Trent, we’re sort of talking completely different boats on different waterways.
I take it all the workboats you know that have done the Ribble link, were not carrying a full cargo? Is that a Pooh-Pooh back at, as the kids say? 

  Anyway you know it’s only banter. Where’s your shell now, still at Tim’s or up to Sheffield?

Edited August 8, 2022 by PD1964

[PD1964]

55 minutes ago, peterboat said:

 

Actually Julian I think you will be right, my last time out I noticed a big decline in the big navigation up here, piling had collapsed into the waters all over the place.

Fishermen had managed to stop commercial boats on the Aire and Calder a navigation that had, had billions spent on it for commercial boats! It might be overturned but who knows?

And now stoppages all over due to water shortages , in reality farmers quite rightly are drawing millions of gallons of water off to water crops which are more important than us boaters. We are the bottom of the food chain so yes maybe the time is drawing in on our boating way of life.

You are right I wouldn't spend a fortune on a boat now in fact if I had a good offer I might sell mine and buy an electric campervan 

But your still getting the first time middle class buyers spending £250K, to live the lifestyle we have had for many years. The people I’m meeting that I’ve never seen up here before, have only had the boat 2 years max, the majority less then a year. Most like @IanD well into their 60’s the majority decent polite people. Maybe we were lucky to start it in our 40’s and are still relatively fit. As you say locks breaking down every day, water shortages, dross/chavs taking over visitor moorings. Would much rather spend £250K on a nice quiet overseas place , then try to live the dream on the canals now, as it could turn into a bit of a nightmare on certain canals and areas.

Edited August 8, 2022 by PD1964

[MtB]

58 minutes ago, Loddon said:

We will see in 2032 whether I'm right or not, at the least canals will be in terminal decline.

 

1 hour ago, Loddon said:

I wouldn't consider an electric boat for the  same base reason I wont consider an electric car its to much money.

Spending at least £100k+ on a boat is nonsensical when you consider  that the canal system as we have known it will be gone in ten years.

 

 

What a load of old cobblers. 

 

The canal system as we know it will still be here, just smaller. The Thames ring, the Four Counties ring and the K&A and the Llangollen will be no different! 

 

Granted all the other no-hoper canals will all be closed except to canoes and paddle-boarders. But who cares when they are such a PITA to navigate even now...

[peterboat]

25 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

 Even more foolish if your spending over £230K then, 

I take it the owner of Spey and these working boats, worked the Trent and the Northern waterways when it was a full commercial system? 
 There’s still old commercial boatman around and they say they used the tides. They will tell you that some of the flat fronted keels with full loads couldn’t do it against.
  Your talking about old working boats carrying no cargo, go and stick 50 ton and more of cargo in, totally different to how it was. Your talking to people that have bought into it and not people that used to do it, back in the 60’s all the way up to a few year ago.

I did say that the 20 hp lister was moving a hundred tons which is what Sheffield/trent keels carried.......with the tides 

Edited August 8, 2022 by peterboat

[Ian Mac]

4 hours ago, dmr said:

 how soon will cold fussion arrive? 😀

 

See  this - things are really move on, maybe!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E6jzJijHrd88Zfm6S2YyRs-uD2_eXJ-4/view?ts=62c608cd

[PD1964]

51 minutes ago, peterboat said:

I did say that the 20 hp lister was moving a hundred tons which is what Sheffield/trent keels carried.......with the tides 

I know, even know that when they started fitting the JP2’s to the Keels during the war they were £240 each, had a very interesting few weeks at Waddingtons learnt lots of local history looking at hundreds of old photos. Far Far more interesting then talking Kw output of an electric motor at 95% efficiency😂👍

 I wonder how many gallons of HVO this beast would use in an hour, punching against the tide with a full cargo and head wind😂

Edited August 8, 2022 by PD1964

[IanD]

11 hours ago, PD1964 said:

 Even more foolish if your spending over £230K then, 

I take it the owner’s of these working boats, worked the Trent and the Northern waterways when it was a full commercial system?
 There’s still old commercial boatman around and they say they used the tides. They will tell you that some of the flat fronted keels with full loads couldn’t do it against a full tide.
  Your talking about old working Narrowboats carrying no cargo, go and stick 50 ton and more of cargo in, totally different scenario to a fully laiden boat. Your talking to people that have bought into it and not people that used to do it, back in the 60’s all the way up to a few year ago. Also your talking narrowboats with 20hp engines, I’m talking Sheffield, Humber, Barnsley Keels roughly 60ft x 15ft with a JP2 or JP3 working the Tidal Trent, we’re sort of talking completely different boats on different waterways.
I take it all the workboats you know that have done the Ribble link, were not carrying a full cargo? Is that a Pooh-Pooh back at, as the kids say? 

  Anyway you know it’s only banter. Where’s your shell now, still at Tim’s or up to Sheffield?

I'm simply talking about what power boats need *nowadays* to be able to do the Ribble Link and the Trent and similar rivers.

 

It wasn't me who diverted the thread onto how things used to be in the good old days when boatmen were *real* boatmen -- except inasmuch as traditional-engined narrowboats with 20hp or so are perfectly capable of such travel, and therefore hybrid boats with similar continuous power (15kW) also are, and why this is so in spite of the fact that modern diesels are typically rated at 40hp-50hp.

 

Shell is being painted at Finesse, I'm going up there next week to discuss progress with Ricky 🙂

Edited August 9, 2022 by IanD

[IanD]

10 hours ago, MtB said:

 

 

 

What a load of old cobblers. 

 

The canal system as we know it will still be here, just smaller. The Thames ring, the Four Counties ring and the K&A and the Llangollen will be no different! 

 

Granted all the other no-hoper canals will all be closed except to canoes and paddle-boarders. But who cares when they are such a PITA to navigate even now...

 

It would be a great shame if "all the other no-hoper canals" -- presumably meaning the Rochdale, HNC, L&L, Caldon, Peak Forest, Macclesfield, in other words all the ones with relatively little traffic, lots of locks, and poor water supplies -- were to close, because these are also some of the nicest canals on the system to actually travel on (when working).

 

I suspect there would also be a massive outcry and the possible revival of the canal preservation societies, and it would perhaps also be legally difficult for CART to effectively abandon these waterways.

 

The fundamental problem is the same as for the NHS and social care, insufficient funding. Including the maintenance backlog which has built up over the last ten years or so, it's been estimated that CART need at least a 50% increase in funding (about £100M/yr) to keep the canal system usable, and in spite of the fact that this is a *tiny* sum in government terms there's no sign of any acknowledgement from CART or the government that this is what is really needed, and no plan as to how this could be funded 😞

 

This doesn't *have* to continue, but it would need either a change in heart (e.g. increased government funding) or a radical change in CART fundraising (e.g. higher and more graduated license fees) to raise the money.

[Alan de Enfield]

12 minutes ago, IanD said:

I suspect there would also be a massive outcry and the possible revival of the canal preservation societies, and it would perhaps also be legally difficult for CART to effectively abandon these waterways.

 

It is actually written into one of the waterway acts, that if BW (C&RT) can show that they have insufficient funds to maintain the canals they can just decide not to maintain some of them.

 

Any canals identified as Crusing or Commercial canals must be maintained but the 1968 Act allows  :

 

a new obligation imposed on the Board to deal with all waterways not in the category either of Commercial or Cruising waterways, i.e. the remainder (termed for the sake of convenience the ‘Remainder waterways”) in the most economical manner e.g. either retention, elimination or disposal, as most appropriate.

[peterboat]

16 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

It would be a great shame if "all the other no-hoper canals" -- presumably meaning the Rochdale, HNC, L&L, Caldon, Peak Forest, Macclesfield, in other words all the ones with relatively little traffic, lots of locks, and poor water supplies -- were to close, because these are also some of the nicest canals on the system to actually travel on (when working).

 

I suspect there would also be a massive outcry and the possible revival of the canal preservation societies, and it would perhaps also be legally difficult for CART to effectively abandon these waterways.

 

The fundamental problem is the same as for the NHS and social care, insufficient funding. Including the maintenance backlog which has built up over the last ten years or so, it's been estimated that CART need at least a 50% increase in funding (about £100M/yr) to keep the canal system usable, and in spite of the fact that this is a *tiny* sum in government terms there's no sign of any acknowledgement from CART or the government that this is what is really needed, and no plan as to how this could be funded 😞

 

This doesn't *have* to continue, but it would need either a change in heart (e.g. increased government funding) or a radical change in CART fundraising (e.g. higher and more graduated license fees) to raise the money.

I think the ones that will go would go would be the ones with poor water supply ie proper  canals not navigations

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It is actually written into one of the waterway acts, that if BW (C&RT) can show that they have insufficient funds to maintain the canals they can just decide not to maintain some of them.

 

Any canals identified as Crusing or Commercial canals must be maintained but the 1968 Act allows  :

 

a new obligation imposed on the Board to deal with all waterways not in the category either of Commercial or Cruising waterways, i.e. the remainder (termed for the sake of convenience the ‘Remainder waterways”) in the most economical manner e.g. either retention, elimination or disposal, as most appropriate.

There you go Alan safe for a while on the S&SYN

[IanD]

15 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

It is actually written into one of the waterway acts, that if BW (C&RT) can show that they have insufficient funds to maintain the canals they can just decide not to maintain some of them.

 

Any canals identified as Crusing or Commercial canals must be maintained but the 1968 Act allows  :

 

a new obligation imposed on the Board to deal with all waterways not in the category either of Commercial or Cruising waterways, i.e. the remainder (termed for the sake of convenience the ‘Remainder waterways”) in the most economical manner e.g. either retention, elimination or disposal, as most appropriate.

That's why I said "perhaps"... 😉

 

Which canals are classed as "Remainder waterways"?

[Alan de Enfield]

10 minutes ago, IanD said:

That's why I said "perhaps"... 😉

 

Which canals are classed as "Remainder waterways"?

 

All the ones that are not on the List of Commercial & Cruising canals.

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

All the ones that are not on the List of Commercial & Cruising canals.

 

Thank you for that helpful smartass reply. Perhaps a link to such a list of remainder waterways (or even posting the list) would be more helpful still? 😉

Edited August 9, 2022 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

7 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Thank you for that helpful smartass reply. Perhaps a link to such a list of remainder waterways (or even posting the list) would be more helpful still? 😉

 

There IS NO LIST OF REMAINDER WATERWAYS.

 

They are the remaining waterways not listed as being either Commercial or Cruising waterways.

 

ukla_19830002_en.pdf (legislation.gov.uk)

Edited August 9, 2022 by Alan de Enfield

[Up-Side-Down]

5 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Thank you for that helpful smartass reply. Perhaps a link to such a list (or even posting the list) would be more helpful still? 😉

Looks like  good starting point: 

 

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

There IS NO LIST OF REMAINDER WATERWAYS.

 

They are the remaining waterways not listed as being either Commercial or Cruising waterways.

 

OK, let's try again...

 

Can you provide a link to an up-to-date list of Commercial and Cruising waterways?

 

Yes I've searched, and found snippets like the fact that the Sheffield and Tinsley and K&A were reclassified from Remainder to Cruising some time ago.

 

What I can't find anywhere is an up-to-date list of either type of waterway. Since you very often post on legal matters relating to the canal, I assume you know where these can be found... 😉

9 minutes ago, Up-Side-Down said:

Looks like  good starting point: 

 

Thanks, I had found that.

 

It seems strange that there is no up-to-date list anywhere (that I can find, anyway...) saying which canals are classified  Commercial, Cruising and Remainder -- you'd think this was quite important to know...

Edited August 9, 2022 by IanD

[IanD]

41 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

OK, let's try again...

 

Can you provide a link to an up-to-date list of Commercial and Cruising waterways?

 

Yes I've searched, and found snippets like the fact that the Sheffield and Tinsley and K&A were reclassified from Remainder to Cruising some time ago.

 

What I can't find anywhere is an up-to-date list of either type of waterway. Since you very often post on legal matters relating to the canal, I assume you know where these can be found... 😉

Thanks, I had found that.

 

It seems strange that there is no up-to-date list anywhere (that I can find, anyway...) saying which canals are classified  Commercial, Cruising and Remainder -- you'd think this was quite important to know...

 

Having searched through the various Acts, it seems that cruising waterways (which CART must keep open) include (among others):

 

Ashton, BCN, Calder & Hebble, Caldon, Coventry, Erewash, GU, K&A, Lancaster, L&L, Peak Forest, Macclesfield, Mon&Brec, Oxford, Shroppie, Stourbidge, S&W, Stratford, T&M, W&B...

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/73/schedule/12/2011-04-18

 

Which means that -- unless they've also been reclassified from Remainder to Cruising like the K&A was -- the only obvious "all the other no-hoper canals" closure candidates are the Rochdale and HNC.

 

Does anyone know what the current status of these is?

 

If they're still Remainder, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a strong movement to reclassify them as Cruising (like the K&A), especially if they were threatened with closure -- particularly given the tens of millions that were spent restoring and reopening them...

 

Either way, the apocalyptic "the network's going to close" prediction seems unlikely, a number of Acts of Parliament would be needed to close Cruising waterways -- which is unlikely to happen...

Edited August 9, 2022 by IanD

[Up-Side-Down]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

 

Having searched through the various Acts, it seems that cruising waterways (which CART must keep open) include (among others):

 

Ashton, Caldon, L&L, Peak Forest, Macclesfield, Mon&Brec, Shroppie, Stratford, Oxford...

 

Which means that -- unless they've also been reclassified from Remainder to Cruising like the K&A was -- the only obvious "all the other no-hoper canals" closure candidates are the Rochdale and HNC.

 

Does anyone know what the current status of these is?

 

Either way, the apocalyptic "the network's going to close" prediction seems unlikely, a number of Acts of Parliament would be needed to close Cruising waterways -- which is unlikely to happen...

I remember that there was great rejoicing when the two Scottish Lowland Canals were reclassified as Cruising canals about 10 years ago, following their restoration in 2002. 

 

Whilst this greatly increases the likelihood that they will be maintained, it certainly doesn't guarantee it, nor for that matter does a Commercial designation guarantee that a waterway will be maintained for commercial use, dredged to its original depth. There is a wee clause in the wording of the Act that says something to the effect that the relevant minister (currently George Eustace) can over ride this requirement. I suspect the same is true when it comes to maintaining a navigation as a Cruiseway. 

[IanD]

10 minutes ago, Up-Side-Down said:

I remember that there was great rejoicing when the two Scottish Lowland Canals were reclassified as Cruising canals about 10 years ago, following their restoration in 2002. 

 

Whilst this greatly increases the likelihood that they will be maintained, it certainly doesn't guarantee it, nor for that matter does a Commercial designation guarantee that a waterway will be maintained for commercial use, dredged to its original depth. There is a wee clause in the wording of the Act that says something to the effect that the relevant minister (currently George Eustace) can over ride this requirement. I suspect the same is true when it comes to maintaining a navigation as a Cruiseway. 

 

The Minister can reclassify canals but needs the approval of Parliament to do so -- this is how the K&A and the Scottish canals got upgraded. I imagine any attempt to downgrade canals from Cruising to Remainder would meet with strong opposition...

 

For Cruising waterways CART are legally bound to "maintain the cruising waterways in a suitable condition for use by cruising craft", i.e. keep them open for use by craft of "appropriate dimensions".

Edited August 9, 2022 by IanD

[peterboat]

15 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Having searched through the various Acts, it seems that cruising waterways (which CART must keep open) include (among others):

 

Ashton, BCN, Calder & Hebble, Caldon, Coventry, Erewash, GU, K&A, Lancaster, L&L, Peak Forest, Macclesfield, Mon&Brec, Oxford, Shroppie, Stourbidge, S&W, Stratford, T&M, W&B...

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/73/schedule/12/2011-04-18

 

Which means that -- unless they've also been reclassified from Remainder to Cruising like the K&A was -- the only obvious "all the other no-hoper canals" closure candidates are the Rochdale and HNC.

 

Does anyone know what the current status of these is?

 

If they're still Remainder, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a strong movement to reclassify them as Cruising (like the K&A), especially if they were threatened with closure -- especially given the tens of millions that were spent reopening them...

 

Either way, the apocalyptic "the network's going to close" prediction seems unlikely, a number of Acts of Parliament would be needed to close Cruising waterways -- which is unlikely to happen...

No money no repairs, put up license people sell up and leave so even less revenue!

Now don't get me wrong I love my boating life, but if I thought the writing was on the wall I would sell immediately, we have a bungalow and a camper which I would change for a Morris JE Asap to convert to a campervan. At my age I wouldn't fight a battle that I have little prospect of winning 

[IanD]

11 minutes ago, peterboat said:

No money no repairs, put up license people sell up and leave so even less revenue!

Now don't get me wrong I love my boating life, but if I thought the writing was on the wall I would sell immediately, we have a bungalow and a camper which I would change for a Morris JE Asap to convert to a campervan. At my age I wouldn't fight a battle that I have little prospect of winning 

 

The fact remains that CART are effectively prevented from closing most of the canals (all those classed as Commercial or Cruising), with the possible exception of the Rochdale and HNC (TBD).

 

Since they have a legally binding duty as follows:

 

(1)With a view to securing the general availability of the commercial and cruising waterways for public use, it shall be the duty of the Waterways Board, subject to the provisions of this section—

(a)to maintain the commercial waterways in a suitable condition for use by commercial freight-carrying vessels; and

(b)to maintain the cruising waterways in a suitable condition for use by cruising craft, that is to say, vessels constructed or adapted for the carriage of passengers and driven by mechanical power.

 

if they don't do this they'll find themselves open to legal action, possibly from an organisation of canal users -- I'm sure nowadays that funding to bring such an action could easily be raised by crowdfunding, and legally speaking CART wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

 

This isn't a case of CART being able to do what they want, they have a legal duty to keep these canals open and usable. If they protest "we can't afford to do this" then this doesn't resolve them of this duty, so the only options are for changes to the law to remove this duty (needs an Act of Parliament) or find a way to provide the money to enable them to do their duty.

 

Given the relatively modest sum involved and the terrible publicity that would result from canal closures (destroying our national heritage!), I suspect the government (and CART) will find that raising more money is a much less unpleasant option... 😉

Edited August 9, 2022 by IanD

[Up-Side-Down]

13 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

The fact remains that CART are effectively prevented from closing most of the canals (all those classed as Commercial or Cruising), with the possible exception of the Rochdale and HNC (TBD).

 

Since they have a legally binding duty as follows:

 

(1)With a view to securing the general availability of the commercial and cruising waterways for public use, it shall be the duty of the Waterways Board, subject to the provisions of this section—

(a)to maintain the commercial waterways in a suitable condition for use by commercial freight-carrying vessels; and

(b)to maintain the cruising waterways in a suitable condition for use by cruising craft, that is to say, vessels constructed or adapted for the carriage of passengers and driven by mechanical power.

 

if they don't do this they'll find themselves open to legal action, possibly from an organisation of canal users -- I'm sure nowadays that funding to bring such an action could easily be raised by crowdfunding, and legally speaking CART wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

 

This isn't a case of CART being able to do what they want, they have a legal duty to keep these canals open and usable. If they protest "we can't afford to do this" then this doesn't resolve them of this duty, so the only options are for changes to the law to remove this duty (needs an Act of Parliament) or find a way to provide the money to enable them to do their duty.

 

Given the relatively modest sum involved and the terrible publicity that would result from canal closures (destroying our national heritage!), I suspect the government (and CART) will find that raising more money is a much less unpleasant option... 😉

I think that's a pretty realistic analysis Ian and I suspect that is the sort of default position CRT keep in the back of their minds in their current negotiations with DEFRA to set the next round of funding for the waterways, beginning 2027. I believe their are currently 3 scenarios based on possible funding outcomes that CRT have tentatively outlined, and a couple of them are not terribly palatable from the boaters point of view.

[GUMPY]

4 hours ago, IanD said:

20hp or so are perfectly capable of such travel,

Except it's Torque at low revs swinging a big 24"+ prop that gets a boat with a JP2 through.

20Hp from a JP2 is not the same as 20Hp from a Beta 3